Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I
unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any
more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community
for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.

On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Fredrik S.
<removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> I changed the color a bit on the Ruby logo, and I think it looks better> (and if I may say so, fits with Why's (Poignant) Guide to Ruby better as> well).>> Attachments:> http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/2955/attracti...>
The trick is to stay the same.

From: Fredrik S. [mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid]
# I changed the color a bit on the Ruby logo, and I think it
# looks better
# (and if I may say so, fits with Why's (Poignant) Guide to
# Ruby better as
# well).
#
# Attachments:
# http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/2955/attracti...
that's not red :)
btw, if you only color the jewel and the ruby font, it is much better
and the whole logo would stand out. i would prefer that the font be
changed too. Currently, the font looks as if it's an ad from a cosmetic
or perfume.. (no offense intended)

PeÃ±a, Botp wrote:
> From: Fredrik S. [mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid]> # I changed the color a bit on the Ruby logo, and I think it> # looks better>> that's not red :)
True. It should be a ruby coloring. On the other hand, though the GEM
should be colored as a ruby, perhaps a tweak of the [b]background[/b]
might help a bit.

On Nov 23, 9:30 am, Fredrik S. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> I changed the color a bit on the Ruby logo, and I think it looks better> (and if I may say so, fits with Why's (Poignant) Guide to Ruby better as> well).>> Attachments:http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/2955/attracti...>> --> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
I think the "Atractive Version" lacks some of the elegance of the
original. It is nice, but I think elegance is a important factor for
the Ruby logo, since elegance is important for Ruby itself. :)
However, a change in the background only could be nice, although it's
hard to say without actually seeing one.

PeÃ±a, Botp wrote:
> that's not red :)
Yes, but rubies aren't only red. They vary in color
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby).
From Wikipedia: "The finest ruby is best described as being a vivid
medium-dark toned red. Secondary hues add an additional complication.
Pink, orange, and purple are the normal secondary hues in ruby. Of the
three, purple is preferred because, firstly, the purple reinforces the
red making it appear richer[3]. Secondly, purple occupies a position on
the color wheel halfway between red and blue."
The color of the ruby in the logo doesn't look very "vivid".
attractive_version.png was just a mockup. But I still think it could use
an edge. So I think some purple/pink to spice it up would look very good
if not overused (like it was in attractive_version.png, I just changed
the hue of the whole image). Would be interesting to see some attempts
at this.